> I typically avoid any most abstractions or third party dependencies
Right, so depending on an LLM makes perfect sense in that case, thanks for clarifying :)
1,630 karma · joined January 3, 2025
Right, so depending on an LLM makes perfect sense in that case, thanks for clarifying :)
It's completing shit. Even if it does not implement some lazy stuff with empty catch blocks (i.e. happy path from programming 101 tutorials), it will either expose your secrets in a sensible place or do some other stupidity.
No, if you have to do all of the stuff you have listed to kind-of-make-it-work...You are not in charge.
The reads like typical MBA-efficiency-idiocy taken to the extreme. Clearly this guy is so deeply isolated from the actual work that he cannot even begin to comprehend just how utterly stupid this idea is. It's one thing to push for 100x engineering "output" with "AI", but something completely different to expect a single person to be 3-4 persons in one. Pure schizophrenia - but at least companies like Coinbase which adopt the AI-first illusion will burn themselves faster and leave the room for something new and genuinely innovative.
Right, because its totally something an LLM can do, right?
a) that's not what a linter is built for, its a tool with very specific role
b) You must've never seen LLM expose secrets in plain text or use the most convoluted scenarios you can think of.
:) :) :) I could tell immediately you are somehow vested in the "success" of the LLM. So 600 B dollars and five years later, can you tell me how far did you guys get? Apollo programme costed a tiny fraction of that and started putting people on the moon some ~10 years later. Would you say that you are on the way to accomplish something similar in the next five years?
On the one hand, very encouraging to see plain old deterministic infra w/o using slop machines.
On the other hand, this is a recognition that LLMs are just additional friction in the system that we would better off without in the first place!
You're missing the bigger picture here. Yeah, they produce code. But "producing" code was never the bottleneck. Yes you can pop out a webapp within a couple of hours, but now you have no clue how it works, even if its a language and framework you are competent it in, because you skipped the part where you understand how the parts fit in together architecturally. So you wrote an elaborate spec, but the LLM "decides" to do something else. Maybe they don't make that PK autoincrement or they throw you in those nice empty "catch" blocks they ingested from various beginner tutorials, which will be very "helpful" when you application silently deviates from the happy path execution that you spec'ed the hell out of in your virulent spec-driven-workflow.. So it "kinda" works, it generates the code. It works the way your kid's toy car works - it "drives" but it cannot be driven to work, can it? So it does not work in the big picture. It's not a reliable enterprise ready system. It's a toy, and should be treated like one.